Legal Opinion

Sapp v. Azar

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided June 15, 1977No. 8405PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBell, P. J.

The subject appeal involves two separately numbered cases which, in turn, involve the same parties in reversed roles as plaintiffs and defendant. Mr. and Mrs. Sapp, defendants in case No. 537736, and plaintiffs in the case now on appeal, 76 CV F 8242, are referred to as plaintiffs for the purpose of this appeal. Mr. Azar is referred to as defendant.

It seems concluded as fact that in 1972 defendant became involved as an agent in the sale of certain realty purchased by plaintiffs. In conjunction with the sale, particularly the down payment therefor, plaintiffs borrowed $400 from defendant as…

2Cited by6 opinions

  1. Geauga Truck & Implement Co. v. JuskiewiczOhio Supreme Court · 1984
  2. Stojkoski v. Main 271 S., L.L.C.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2011
  3. Herbert v. Huntington Natl. BankOhio Court of Appeals · 2011
  4. Urbana College v. ConwayOhio Court of Appeals · 1985
  5. McDonald Investments, Inc. v. Fearn, Unpublished Decision (2-28-2002)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2002

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API